Kgerrie157 Posted July 8, 2016 Share Posted July 8, 2016 Hi, This dyno is of a Forged 2.5 SCDB, Japspeed FMIC, MDX321T, RCM Headers, RCM Induction kit (100mm MAF Housing), Upgrade turbo Inlet, 850cc Lateral Injectors, on a open source map at 1.3 Bar. Do you guys think there would be a improvement on a ECUTEK map at 1.5 bar?, car is a Hawk so would have Speed Density map with Racerom Features. Anybody got a similar spec dyno to compare to? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tidgy Posted July 9, 2016 Share Posted July 9, 2016 Got a boost AFR graph? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kgerrie157 Posted July 10, 2016 Author Share Posted July 10, 2016 I have not pal, do you think a Japspeed FMIC would cause 600rpm of lag?, Here is a dyno at 1.5 bar with TMIC, mapper could not let it go below that as turbo at time was new and would not let him. I watched mapping and boost profiles pretty much match torque 1.3 392lbft, 1.45 I think it was 420lbft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kgerrie157 Posted July 10, 2016 Author Share Posted July 10, 2016 On 419bhp graph boost went to 1.5, then reduced to 1.3 then went back up to 1.5, as turbo was taking over ecu. When FMIC was fitted, mapper managed to get a 1.3 straight line. however I have a feeling this has reduced spool, must be due to a less aggressive wastegate duty on spool to get 1.3 bar, I believe this as I did see one spool he done, which was 1.5 bar in which this boost came in much quicker but quickly overshot. He was using open source software and tried and tried but could not get any more torque safely without the overshoot, as 1.5/1.55 bar would have give this. I suppose it would be trying to capture the spool capability of the package whilst stopping overboost, as don't want to go above 1.55 bar as on SCDB. I know syveccs is one option but it is really expensive and would rather live with first graph than spend that sort money. The question is does ECUTEK software with Speed Density Mapping give better boost control? visibility to mapper to increase torque safely?, Could Japspeed FMIC be causing torque loss? (Cant see it as got advanced ignition timing with fmic), Just think 392lbft on a MDX321T 2.5 is a bit low. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
savage bulldogs Posted July 10, 2016 Share Posted July 10, 2016 I haven't got any personal experience with 2.5 or newage mapping software and I personally leave my mapping to Clive attowe at Norwich. I assume that you've upgraded the fuel pump but what about the boost solenoid or is the standard hawk set up a 3 port anyway ? As a 3 port does give the mapper better control over the boost when mapping. What up pipe are you running and have you looked into a "Harvey trick " up pipe from AS performance ? As this might aid spool a bit . I wouldn't have thought a fmic would cause 600 rpm of lag in 3rd or 4th gear, especially on a 2.5 ltr engine (it didn't on my 2ltr) Have you tried to email any other mappers regarding the spec and functions of the newage ecu software options and capabilities. Either way I bet the cars no slouch with those figures anyway and best of luck getting the most out of what you've got If it's not broke .....upgrade it 😊 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tidgy Posted July 11, 2016 Share Posted July 11, 2016 ECU is struggling to cope with the setup, Aftermarket ecu would be the best way to go (as you say syvecs). My old hawk struggled (forged 2.5 on an sc46+ with ecutek map). Didn't like idling smoothly when coming to a stop either cos of the mass of the turbo. Check out the fueling before 4500 and the way it plummets then spikes before settling, The T is a 450bhp turbo at 1.6 bar, so your bound to get a lower result at 1.3. I'm assuming its still running the MAF? Ecu wasn't designed to run that high boost or that much power, my advice bite the bullet and syvecs it. Different cars with different parts will get different results, but on low boost (as above graph) Basic spec, (Was held back cos of the top mount), but was single AVCS heads, standard headers, full decat and decat up pipe, sti top mount, sti inlet manifold, 400L fuel pump, 800cc (i think) and SC46+ mapped on Ecutek by pat Herborn. My current 2.5 is running less power, but on syvecs, you can see ont he graph how much smoother it is, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kgerrie157 Posted July 20, 2016 Author Share Posted July 20, 2016 Hi, Sorry for late reply lads, been really busy. Yea got 3 port, Did Pat use Speed Density Tidgy?, I have spoke to Andy Forrest and he reckons, ECUTEK on Hawk ecu can easily cope with 1.7-1.8 bar, I assume he uses Racerom Speed Density rather than rescaling maf as this is dangerous, he says ECUTEK OEM boost control is fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kgerrie157 Posted July 20, 2016 Author Share Posted July 20, 2016 Car has RCM Headers savage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tidgy Posted July 21, 2016 Share Posted July 21, 2016 13 hours ago, Kgerrie157 said: Hi, Sorry for late reply lads, been really busy. Yea got 3 port, Did Pat use Speed Density Tidgy?, I have spoke to Andy Forrest and he reckons, ECUTEK on Hawk ecu can easily cope with 1.7-1.8 bar, I assume he uses Racerom Speed Density rather than rescaling maf as this is dangerous, he says ECUTEK OEM boost control is fine. From what i understood to get it that high you had to run it without some of the safety systems in place, i'll ask pat and see what he says. I'm by no means an expert on that level of technical info so info i have tends to be what i've asked when i've got to that stage of tune. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.